Comments on: Notes on France’s ban-the-burqa debatehttp://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2009/07/03/notes-on-frances-ban-the-burqa-debate/
Religion, faith and ethicsTue, 03 Mar 2015 22:46:46 +0000hourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=3.8.3By: Kevin_Ashtonhttp://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2009/07/03/notes-on-frances-ban-the-burqa-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-23513
Sun, 31 Jan 2010 04:47:07 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/?p=6873#comment-23513This question has a number of dimensions. One dimension is the Children’s Right.
If parents have a RIGHT to bring up their children that nudity is a very good thing then should we allow those children – when they are fully grown up – to walk nude in our streets? Here, the majority of adults can argue that this is against their wish and VOTE to ban it. By the same token, if children in some families – say in a democratic Muslim country – are victimised by an education or family tradition – not religious as we know it – to wear a Burkha, then members of the democratic Muslim society can vote that this is against what the prophet Muhammad decreed and hence we VOTE to ban it. Oh’ people of the west, Oh the right wing extremists of Europe, please understand that Burkha has nothing to do with Islam or Kuran. Please do not bush Muslims with this backward tribal tradition. An Oh moderate Muslims of the world please rise against the oppressive families who force their women and daughters to follow an old tradition which is bringing disgrace to your religion.
]]>By: Andrewhttp://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2009/07/03/notes-on-frances-ban-the-burqa-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-13493
Thu, 09 Jul 2009 03:05:21 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/?p=6873#comment-13493Islamization of Europe must never happen, and this is a good first step to doing that. Multi-culturalism is a failure!
]]>By: Johnhttp://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2009/07/03/notes-on-frances-ban-the-burqa-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-13470
Wed, 08 Jul 2009 18:35:12 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/?p=6873#comment-13470I cannot see a problem at all. This form of dress is, after all, just a disguise at best. It should be banned along with Islam, from the Western world. It has NO place anywhere. MOVE
]]>By: Franceshttp://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2009/07/03/notes-on-frances-ban-the-burqa-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-13441
Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:13:27 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/?p=6873#comment-13441Once again, the western world cannot rise above its own biases about what a piece of clothing means to consider that this piece of clothing might mean something very different to the people wearing it.Just because the West views the burqa as a sign of repression and wouldn’t wear them doesn’t mean that the people wearing them feel repressed. Many Muslims views the burqa as a a testament to their faith, especially in a nation in which they are in the minority. The west also supposedly stands for religious freedom and tolerance — funny how that gets ignored just because we can’t stretch our minds a little and think outside our own tiny box.The meaning of individual items such as clothing are not universal, but are instead charged by context. Putting a lump statement over them about feminism and freedom turns those same values into oppression.
]]>By: Raseena Sherifhttp://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2009/07/03/notes-on-frances-ban-the-burqa-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-13353
Mon, 06 Jul 2009 04:39:56 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/?p=6873#comment-13353Why I wear a Hijab ?By Raseena SherifI was asked by a friend about why I wear a hijab. This is my answer.You asked me ages ago why I wore the hijab. It was always somewhere in my mind – not necessarily always the back – that I should reply and I finally decided I wouldn’t put off your reply any longer, and therefore you shall have it.Having grown up in a practising Muslim household, many things were just handed over to me. And having studied in an Islamic school all my life, consequently having an entirely Muslim circle of friends, I never questioned them. That was the way things were done in my little world, and it was therefore the way I did things too. The hijab was one of them. I grew up in it. Physically and also mentally. I think the question, or at least the one with the more interesting answer, is why I continue to wear the hijab even after having spent more than three years now, in Christian colleges, and with a friend circle that is largely non- Muslim.There are many things I found in the hijab as I grew up. Things as varied as the convenience of not having to spend considerable amount of worry and time on my wardrobe and outside appearance, to philosophical, spiritual, and you might be surprised to hear this, but even feminist concepts that I feel proud to stand up for and show my belief in.In wearing a hijab, a woman is identified by the things she does and the things she stands for, rather than her looks. Even as a woman, there are times when I have found myself identifying another woman by her looks, where I might ask “Oh, the one with the long hair?” In underplaying my looks, I force others to look for more in me.My hijab saves me a lot of the time, effort, thought and worry that would otherwise go into my dress, my hair, my skin and my make up. I think it’s a pity that while theoretically looks aren’t supposed to matter, one must spend so much time and money on them. With the hijab, looking good means looking neat and the best part is that I get to stop where others begin.Comments on: France ponders a burqa ban | No cover up | The Economist on Wednesday, 01-07-2009 at 09:35amLooking back now, at how I began to wear the hijab, I’m glad I did start the way I did. In spite of the fact that I prefer to find things out for myself, and hate taking things for granted, or doing things without really believing them. Because having started the way I did, to me, the hijab was always just another type of clothing.I think about the kind of stereotypes people have about hijabs, and women who wear them, and I know that if I were left to discover the hijab for myself, it would have been tough for me to go beyond those stereotypes, to go back on all that I grew up hearing, seeing and believing, and to allow myself to actually see the hijab for what it is and its beauty. Having grown up wearing it, in a society that didn’t jump to conclusions about me because I did, or look at me like I was weird, I have always felt comfortable in it, and never thought of myself as any different from the rest. It was just my way of dressing. And with the stage for objective evaluation of that type of dressing set, I have come to love that way of dressing above others.On the other hand, I know there are those that hate the hijab they wear. I feel bad for them – for the fact that they are forced to do something they don’t even understand, and the fact that they haven’t understood something so beautiful. However, I think the saddest part is that they are losing out on both the happiness they might have found in dressing the way they would have liked to, and the happiness they could have found in pleasing their Creator. It’s always our intentions that are considered and if you’re doing something only because you’re forced to, it doesn’t count. You might as well enjoy yourself living life the way you want to. And then if you are fortunate enough to find God for yourself, I think you are really lucky.In fact, I feel bad for all those Islamic ideologies that are reduced to meaningless customs and traditions, and the joke that they have been allowed to become in the minds of people. Anyway, I won’t start on that or I shall go on for a couple more pages. I just want to ask you to make a distinction between actual Islamic ideology and the actions that one sees from some people born into Muslim households – especially the kind I heard you grew up with.In the hijab, honestly, I feel blessed.
]]>By: Raseena Sherifhttp://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2009/07/03/notes-on-frances-ban-the-burqa-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-13352
Mon, 06 Jul 2009 04:38:25 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/?p=6873#comment-13352As a Muslim Lady, I want to say certain things:There are lots of misconceptions about MUSLIM WOMEN in West, let me make things clear:1. Western media needs to do survey of Muslim countries to find out real picture, it shouldn’t be Biased.2. Read Chapter NISA(Women) from holy Quran, it speaks about Women Rights, to Property, Education, Work, Liberty and freedom of thought and speech.3. 50% of Business in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is headed by Muslim Women, Read Arab News.4. There was no Women American President, but Muslim countries had Female leaders like Benazir Bhutto, Khalida zia, sheik Haseena, Megawati Sukhano putri of Indonesia5. TALIBAN and ALQUIDA don’t represent Islam, there are the monsters created by USA(CIA) Pakistan to counter communism and Soviet block.6. Through out Islamic History there were great Muslim female leaders like Razia sultana, Ayeaha, MAriyam, Khadeeja, Fatima, Juveriya etc7. Islam doesn’t restrict female from driving Cars, Saudi Law does, in Islamic history Female warriors rode horses and waged wars.8. BURQA is no sign of slavery, but sign of Protectiona nd Modesty.Comments on: A boost for gays in India | OK to be gay | The Econo
]]>By: John Cooperhttp://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2009/07/03/notes-on-frances-ban-the-burqa-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-13351
Mon, 06 Jul 2009 03:09:06 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/?p=6873#comment-13351I agree with Tom’s analysis that the intellectual effort to defend the need for citizens’ faces to be visible in an open society is probably too much work when the easy trump card of “laïcité” is available.Unfortunately for France, the notion of “laïcité” (Which Tom Heneghan very kindly describes as “separation of church and state”) is grounded on an unhealthy, historical, anti-clerical hostility towards Catholicism which consequently poisons the French Republic’s view toward any organized religion.( Unless it is of course linked to the Dalai Lama and Tibet…. amazing how that double standard is demonstrated consistently in the name of the French Republic. ) Ah…. but what do you expect after generations of l’Education Nationale functionaries rewriting history in the habitual Marxist fashion and denying any positive contributions of organized religion to Western Civilization or France specifically? The Enlightenment centered in France was a major milestone in the GLOBAL development of the rights of the individual. But the Enlightenment never would have happened without the preceding millenium of Western Christianity. One strong piece of evidence… it only happened in Western Europe.
]]>By: John Abdallahhttp://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2009/07/03/notes-on-frances-ban-the-burqa-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-13324
Sat, 04 Jul 2009 06:22:14 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/?p=6873#comment-13324If France’s version of secularism is so fragile, that even some kind of clothes could demolish it, well, it doesn’t deserve survival.
]]>By: davidhttp://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2009/07/03/notes-on-frances-ban-the-burqa-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-13320
Sat, 04 Jul 2009 03:39:46 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/?p=6873#comment-13320Burqa is atrocious even by principle… it has been a tool used by a patriarchal society to oppress and subjugate its women in the name of religion. Since most of the muslim women have been born into and thoroughly conditioned to accept it as normal, they’d really not complain… doesn’t make it any less inhuman.I am partial to what Sarkozy said and hope it is implemented. Although, I’ve mixed feelings about the implications of it on other issues of personal preferences… like inter-racial marriages, homosexuality and so on which majoritarian society may find unpalatable.This may just be a precedent. Soon other less popular issues of personal freedom can just be brought into the ambit of such laws. Quite what the Nazis did.I guess it is a wait and watch then…
]]>By: Tom Heneghanhttp://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2009/07/03/notes-on-frances-ban-the-burqa-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-13318
Fri, 03 Jul 2009 20:55:22 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/?p=6873#comment-13318Geneviève above says she doesn’t quite agree with this analysis because it should be natural in France that people in public can be identified by their faces. “One would not tolerate a passer-by in a ski mask or a motorcyclist who asks you for information while keeping his helmet on his head. The government’s mistake is to single out the burqa,” she writes.The irony of my final paragraph might not come across to all readers as I thought it would. For me, the issue of identity and security in an open society is crucial. Western societies are built on an ideal of personal liberty, which defenders of the burqa in western countries evoke to justify the option to cover up completely. But they overlook the fact that the flip side of that liberty is the demand for a certain level of transparency, so those in the public sphere can see the others there are not hiding or threatening anything. An open and visible face is indispensable in a modern society. A classic example, discussed in the blog post I mentioned, concerns veiled trial witnesses. In the western tradition, one is supposed to “face one’s accusers.” A veiled prosecution witness deprives the defendant of that right and should not be accepted.This issue is so important that it trumps arguments for personal or religious liberty (no, those are not absolutes). That’s why I mentioned it here and expressed regret that it would probably not be discussed in the parliamentary inquiry. If the politicians pushing this burqa ban really wanted to be fair and objective about it and not stigmatise Muslims, they would opt for this argument about the nature of an open society. But unfortunately that would require a lot more intellectual effort and an explicit defence of western culture, which is harder to pull off than a campaign based on popular reactions to specific issuesThe final sentence expresses the view that I think politicians probably take when wondering how to tackle this question. I thought my disappointment with this echoed through those words. If not, I trust it is now understood.
]]>